A Closer Look at Firearm Fatalities, Injuries, and Crime:  Michigan and Nationwide

The scourge of gun violence cuts blindly and ruthlessly through the divides of race, gender, age, geography and economics.  We are touched by it consciously and unconsciously, in both our personal and professional lives: as sons and daughters, as students and teachers, as friends and neighbors.  Ultimately however, it touches us as victims, either directly, by physical injuries to our loved ones, and ourselves and indirectly, by the massive burden that it places on our police, our physicians, and the overall public safety.  The arbitrary and capricious nature of gun violence is apparent in a sampling of recent incidents in Michigan: 

• February 2000: 6 year old Mt. Morris Township student Kayla Rolland is shot and killed by a 6 year old classmate who found a stolen gun at home and brought it to school.¹

• October 2000: Detective Chris Wouters, 42, of the Warren Police Department is shot and killed by a drug suspect with an illegally acquired, unregistered gun.²

• October 2000:  16 year old Justin Mello of New Baltimore is shot and killed while working at a Pizzeria.  The handgun used had been stolen during a robbery in Virginia.³

• December 2000: A 7 year old Detroit boy accidentally shot himself after he found a gun in a hat on the dining room table of his home.  The gun belonged to a 19 year old who had visited the house.⁴

• September 2001:  Federal Protective Services Agent Ronald C. Sheffield, 36, is shot and killed at the McNamara Federal Building in Detroit.  The shooter, who had a history of mental illness, purchased the gun used shortly before the shooting at a gun show in Mount Clemens.⁵

 Despite these tragedies, gun violence has, on the whole, been decreasing.^6,7  However, in order to put this reduction in its proper context, we must examine the possible reasons behind it.  With a broader understanding, we may be better equipped to encourage and support the current downtrend. Or should these trends begin to reverse, and gun violence is again on the increase, we will then be better equipped to turn the tide.

 There are various theories as to why gun violence is declining: more community policing, less drug and alcohol abuse, more criminals behind bars, more concealed weapons permits, a strong domestic economy, and more emphasis on prevention and education.  Many strategies to prevent gun violence are still in their infancy. 

 Some even argue that the decline in violent crime is overstated.  A Milton S. Eisenhower Foundation Report found that fear about crime has increased since the 1960s and that the rate of crime incidents in large cities has actually increased.  The study reported that the violent crime rate in large cities rose from 860 per 100,000 in 1969 to 1218 per 100,000 by 1998.⁸

Michigan Homicide Trends  

According to data from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC),⁹ between 1988 and 1997, the firearm homicide rate in Michigan was 7.31 per 100,000.  This compares to a rate of 6.17 per 100,000 for the same period nationwide.  Michigan’s firearm homicide rate ranks 13^th out of fifty states and the District of Columbia, the highest rate being that of the District of Columbia, at 46.86 per 100,000, and the lowest being that of North Dakota, at .95 per 100,000.  The percentage of total homicides committed with firearms in Michigan, 69%,¹⁰ nearly mirrored that of the United States as a whole, at 68%.  During this period, males accounted for 84% of firearm homicide deaths, the same proportion that occurred over this period nationwide.  Young males in Michigan are particularly at risk:  males aged 15-19 had a rate of 29.92 per 100,000, males aged 20-24 had a rate of 39.94 per 100,000, and males aged 25-34 had a rate of 23.21 per 100,000.  All of these groups have rates significantly higher than the national rates of 24.49 per 100,000 for males aged 15-19, 30.98 per 100,000 for males aged 20-24, and 19.13 per 100,000 for males aged 25-34.  Both statewide and nationally, the high rates for young males are driven by astronomically high rates for young black males: 

Source: Centers for Disease Control

Taking a closer look at these statistics gives us cause for great alarm.  Although black males between the ages of 15 and 34 made up roughly 2% of Michigan’s total population, they accounted for close to 50% of its gun homicides.  While for the population at large, only 69% of all homicides were committed with firearms, within this subset, 87% of homicides were committed with firearms.  In total, black males accounted for 66% of all firearm homicides during this period.  Comparing the relative risk of firearm homicide for white males and black males raises chilling concerns about our black youth.  Black males aged 15-19 were 40 times more likely to be murdered by firearm than white males of the same age.  The disparity in risk decreases slightly with age, as black males aged 20-24 were 35 times more likely to suffer this fate than white males of the same age, while those aged 25-34 were 23 times more likely than their white counterparts to be murdered with a firearm. 

 While Michigan’s firearm homicide rate was above the national rate for this period, the majority of counties in Michigan were well below the national rate.  Only Berrien County, at 6.8 per 100,000, Genesee County, at 8.39 per 100,000, Saginaw County, at 8.29 per 100,000, and Wayne County, at 22.65 per 100,000, were above the national rate of 6.17 per 100,000.  In these counties, it is primarily young black males who are being murdered with firearms.  In all four counties, the rates of firearm homicide for black males aged 15-34 are over 140 per 100,000, with Wayne County the highest, at 216.93 per 100,000.

 As is the case with suicide, it is difficult to draw firm conclusions about the problem of firearm homicide when the necessary data availability is limited.  For example, on a state level, while data on the gender, age, and race of homicide victim is available, a number of other important factors, such as the circumstances of the homicide, the type of gun used, and the time and place of the homicide are not available and accessible.  Without this data, it is difficult to identify possible points of intervention.

 For a closer look at firearm homicide trends in Michigan, see Exhibits 1, 2a, 2b, and 2c, in the appendix.

National Homicide Trends

 Ludwig and Cook's research provides additional insight on firearm homicide victimization risks.¹¹  Their research suggests the following:

• Black males aged 18 to 29 faces almost 25 times the risk of white males of the same age.  Hispanic males aged 18 to 29 are also at serious risk, roughly 7 times that of white males of the same age.  Black males are at the greatest risk across all ages, followed by Hispanics, but this discrepancy in risk between ethnic groups decreases as age increases.

• Black females aged 18 to 29 are at roughly 7 times the risk of white females of the same age, and over 3 times the risk of Hispanic females of the same age.  As is the case with males, this risk persists across all ages, though the discrepancy decreases somewhat as age increases.

• Across all ages, unmarried males are at significantly greater risk than married males.  Unmarried females under the age of 55 are at greater risk than married females of the same age.

• For both males and females under the age of 55, high school dropouts are at far greater risk than those with a high school degree.  Males and females with at least some college education are at far less risk than both high school dropouts and high school graduates.

• Unemployed males under the age of 55 are at greater risk than employed males of the same age.  Unmarried females are at greater risk than married females.

• In general, risk increases as family income decreases, with both males and females with family income under $14,000 per year at significantly greater risk than individuals with family income greater than $14,000 per year.

• Individuals who have engaged in prior criminal activity are increased risk for firearm homicide.

Firearm use in homicide is not constant across all ages; gun use increases with age up to  age 18 and decreases thereafter.¹²  The large majority of firearm homicides are committed with handguns.  In 1999, 79% of firearm homicides were committed with handguns.¹³ 

According to FBI Supplementary Homicide Reports, in 1999, discounting gun homicides in which circumstances were not reported, roughly 25% of gun homicides were committed as part of felonious activity, 43% resulted from arguments, 11% were gang related, and 20% were classified as "other."  (Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding)¹⁴  These reports also show that gun use is highest in gang related homicides, in which over 90% of cases they were used, that guns are employed in close to 70% of homicides that are committed as part of felonious activities, and over 60% of homicides that result from arguments.

It is also useful to examine trends among those who commit firearm homicides.  18 to 20 year olds have been identified as a high-risk age group for firearm homicide offenses.  A recent report by the Department of Treasury and the FBI found that in 1997, 18, 19, and 20 year olds ranked first, second and third, respectively, in the number of gun homicides committed.¹⁵  Counting all 1997 gun homicides in which a perpetrator was identified, almost one quarter were committed by 18 to 20 year olds.¹⁵  Since the mid 1980s, the percentage of homicides committed with firearms has been significantly higher among 18 to 20 year old offenders than it has been among offenders aged 21 and older.¹⁵ 

Michigan Suicide Trends

 Data from the CDC⁹ shows that between 1988 and 1997, Michigan’s rate of firearm suicide was 6.41 per 100,000, compared with the national rate of 7.18 per 100,000.  During this period, there were 36 states with firearm suicide rates higher than that of Michigan, lead by Nevada at 16.19 per 100,000.  Nationally, 60% of suicides are committed with firearms, compared with 57%¹⁰ in Michigan.  This is not to say that firearm suicide is not a problem in Michigan.  While a number of counties in Michigan enjoy relatively low firearm suicide rates, Branch, Cheboygan, Clare, Emmet, Gladwin, Iron, Manistee, Marquette, Mason, Ogemaw, Roscommon, Sanilac, and Tuscola counties all have rates over 10 per 100,000, with Iron County the highest, at a rate of 15.2 per 100,000.  Rates tend to be higher in rural areas and in the North.  All of the counties with rates over 10 per 100,000, with the exception of Branch County, have population densities under 90 people per square mile, and most are under 50 people per square mile. 

Northern Michigan, a region defined for these purposes as the counties that lay north of Midland County, has a firearm suicide rate of 9.29 per 100,000, while the Upper Peninsula has a rate of 9.55 per 100,000.  What is particularly striking about these two regions is that suicides make up the overwhelming majority of firearm fatalities, as they account for roughly 85% of all firearms deaths.  By contrast, of Michigan’s ten most densely populated counties (according to the 1990 census): Genessee, Ingham, Kalamazoo, Kent, Macomb, Muskegon, Oakland, Ottawa, Washtenaw, and Wayne Counties, only Muskegon’s firearm suicide rate was above the state average, and at 7.23 per 100,000, was very close to the national average of 7.18 per 100,000.  Higher gun ownership levels in these areas¹⁵ may play a role in this disparity, but based on this data alone, it is difficult to tell.  Research suggests that individuals who live in regions where gun ownership is widespread are at increased risk for firearm suicide, as are individuals who live in households with guns.^17,18,19

 CDC data additionally indicates that males are much more likely to commit suicide with a firearm than are females.  Between 1988 and 1997, males accounted for 87% of all firearm suicides nationwide.  The proportion was slightly greater in Michigan, with males accounting for 90% of all firearm suicides.  White males are generally more likely to commit suicide with a firearm than black males.  During this period, the firearm suicide rate for white males was almost twice the state average of 6.41 per 100,000, and at 12.52, was roughly 1.4 times that of the rate for black males, 9.12 per 100,000.  Despite the higher overall rate of firearm suicides for white males, black males between the ages of 15 and 24 had a significantly higher rate of firearm suicide than white males of the same age.  In this age group, black males had a rate of 18.58 per 100,000, compared to a rate of 13.45 for white males.  The largest discrepancy between white males and black males comes among older men.  White males aged 45 and older are at substantially more risk than black males of the same age.  The firearm suicide rate for white males in this age group, at 19.41 per 100,000, is roughly two times that of black males of the same age, 9.82 per 100,000.

 Although no data on location of suicide is available for the time period that we have examined, 1999 data from the Michigan Department of Community Health indicates that over 72% of firearm suicides occurred at a home.²⁰  This simple but poignant statistic alone should again remind us of the dangers of keeping firearms in the home.      

 Unfortunately, in general, the available data on suicide, which, in most cases consists only of the county where the suicide occurred, and the gender and age of the decedent, is extremely limited.  Data such as what type of firearm was used are available in only a limited number of cases, and other important factors such as when and where the suicide took place, and whether drugs or alcohol were involved are generally not available.  With such limited data, it is extremely difficult to understand the true nature of the problem, and to identify effective interventions that can prevent and reduce such incidents.

 For a closer look at firearm suicide trends in Michigan, see Exhibit 3, 4a, 4b, and 4c, in the appendix.

 National Suicide Trends

 Examining national suicide trends and research on firearm suicide provides us with additional insight.  One area of particular concern in the case of firearm suicide is the lethality of the instrument of injury itself, the firearm.  While research suggests a high ratio of suicide attempts to completed suicides (8 to 25 attempts per completion),²¹ firearm suicide attempts result in death in approximately 85% of cases.²²  As firearms have become the primary means of suicide over the past century; in 1950, only 43% of suicides were firearm suicides, compared to nearly 60% in the 1990s; the chances that a suicide attempt will be fatal have increased significantly.¹¹

 Research also provides additional insight on at-risk populations.  Cook and Ludwig examined fatal and non-fatal firearm suicide injuries, and found the following:¹¹

• White males are at the highest risk for firearm suicides across all age groups.  Black males aged 18-29 are at the same level of risk than white males of the same age, but white males aged 30 and over are at significantly more risk than any other segment of the population.

• Among females, white females are at the highest risk for firearm suicide.

• Unmarried persons are at higher risk than married persons.

• The unemployed are at higher risk than the employed.

• Individuals who have received at least some college education are at less risk than those who have not.

• In general, the risk of firearm suicide increases as family income decreases.

Research also indicates that individuals who live in regions where guns are prevalent, are at higher risk for firearm suicide than those who do not.^17,18,19  Additionally, a California study found that in the first week after a handgun purchase, suicide was the leading cause of death among handgun purchasers, accounting for roughly 25% of all deaths and 52% of deaths among women aged 21 to 44.²³  This increased risk of suicide is attributable entirely to the increased risk of firearm suicide.  This study also found that in the first week after a handgun purchase, the rate of suicide by firearm among purchasers was 57 times the rate of the population at large. 

 It is also important to examine the circumstances of firearm suicides.  Although data on firearm suicide gathered by the CDC often lacks information as to the location of the suicide, research on non-fatal self-inflicted firearm injuries suggests that most firearm suicides are attempted at home.⁷  Additionally, the source of firearms used in suicides is an issue that bears examination.  Although little data is available on this question, a 1999 study of self-inflicted and unintentional gunshot wounds among children and adolescents found that a firearm owned by a household member living with the victim was used in 65% of suicide attempts.²⁴  In 57% of cases included in the study, the firearm used in the attempt was owned by a parent.  As well, we must know the types of guns used in firearm suicide.  Research suggests that handguns are used in a majority of firearm suicides; handguns were used in 69% of firearm suicides in one California study.²⁵  Data showing that handguns are involved in a majority of non-fatal self-inflicted firearms injuries for which gun-type is reported, can be read to confirm this fact.⁷

 Fatal Unintentional Shootings

 CDC data⁹ shows that unintentional shootings account for a small fraction of firearm fatalities in Michigan.  Of 13,505 firearm fatalities that occurred in Michigan between 1988 and 1997, only 289, or just over 2% of firearm fatalities were the result of accidental shootings.  During this period, Michigan’s rate of unintentional shooting fatalities, .30 per 100,000, was well below the national rate of .53 per 100,000.  For this period, Michigan had one of the lowest rates of unintentional shooting fatalities in the entire country.  37 states, lead by Alaska, with a rate of 4.35 per 100,000, had rates higher than Michigan, while 12 states, lead by Rhode Island, with a rate of .08 per 100,000, had rates equal to or lower than that of Michigan. 

 Examining trends on the county level is difficult because of the low number of incidents.  In order to calculate a statistically reliable rate, it is necessary that there be at least 20 such incidents.  Most counties encountered only a handful of such incidents between 1988 and 1997, such that the only counties for which reliable rates can be calculated are Genesee and Wayne Counties, with rates of .69 per 100,000 and .28 per 100,000, respectively.  By extending the analysis to almost 20 years, between 1979 and 1997, there is a greater possibility of identifying trends.  By limiting the analysis to those counties in which 10 or more unintentional shooting deaths occurred over this period, the chances are greater that the observed trends are reliable.  While none of this subset of counties has a rate of unintentional shooting deaths over 1 per 100,000, Genesee, Saginaw, and Van Buren counties stand out, with their respective rates of .69 per 100,000, .85 per 100,000, and .75 per 100,000.  As is the case nationwide, males in Michigan account for the great majority of unintentional shooting fatalities; nationally males account for roughly 88% of all such fatalities, while in Michigan, males account for roughly 91%.  Young males are at the highest level of risk, but rates for young males in Michigan are well below national rates for males of the same age.  While Michigan’s unintentional shooting fatality rate for males aged 15-24 was 1.68 per 100,000 between 1979 and 1997, the national rate for the same group over the same period was 2.37 per 100,000.  The only counties with rates that surpass this national average are Genesee County, with a rate of 2.69 per 100,000, and Saginaw County, with a rate of 3.38 per 100,000.

 For a closer look at County-level firearm fatality data, see Exhibits 5, 6a, and 6b, in the appendix.

 National Trends in Fatal Unintentional Shootings

 Examining national trends is also helpful.  Cook and Ludwig’s research provides the following insights into at-risk populations:¹¹

• Black males are at the highest risk for fatal unintentional shootings among males aged 18-29.  In this age group, black males are at more than double the risk of white males, and slightly less than double the risk of Hispanic males.  The disparity in risk decreases for males aged 30 and older.  Among females, risk for fatal unintentional shootings is similar across all racial and age groups.

• Unmarried males are at roughly twice the risk of married males.  Risk is similar among unmarried and married females.

• Males who have received at least some college education are at far less risk than those who have not.  Females of various levels of educational attainment have the same level of risk.

• Males aged 18-29 are at the same level of risk, regardless of employment or unemployment.  Males aged 30-54 who are unemployed are at over four times the risk of employed males of the same age.  Employed males over the age of 55 are at higher risk than unemployed males of the same age.  Unemployed females aged 18-29 are at three times the risk of employed females of the same age.  Among females aged 30 and older, there is no disparity in risk between the employed and the unemployed.

• Among males, risk generally increases as family income decreases.  Data for females is incomplete, making it is difficult to identify a trend.

 Research into the circumstances of unintentional shooting deaths and injuries may also provide insight.  Research of unintentional shooting deaths among children indicate that such incidents typically occur in the home, involve firearms that are found in the home, occur while children are playing with the firearm, and involve a disproportionate number of handguns.^26,27,28  Another study of self-inflicted and unintentional firearm injuries among children found that 72% of firearms involved in unintentional injuries and deaths were owned by a household member living with the victim, or by another relative, friend, or parent of a friend of the victim.²⁴ 

 Research that includes adult populations suggests that the majority of unintentional injuries and deaths are self-inflicted, and typically result from common gun-related activities such as gun cleaning, hunting, playing with the gun, loading/unloading the gun, and target shooting.^29,30 

 CDC data shows that unintentional shooting death rates have declined, in Michigan and nationwide, quite dramatically over the past twenty years. Michigan rate has declined by over 71% in that period, and the national rate by 64%.  Although some portion of this decrease is thought to be the result of changes in the manner that such incidents are accounted for,³¹ this decrease is good news.  However, the miniscule percentage of firearm fatalities that are accidents and the encouraging decreases that we have seen should only serve to remind us how preventable such deaths are.  Compared to foreign nations, we remain at high risk for unintentional injuries and deaths.  Children in the United States below the age of 14 are 9 times more likely to suffer a fatal unintentional gun injury than children of the same age in the rest of the industrialized world.³²    

 Non-Fatal Injuries

 Unfortunately, almost no data on non-fatal injuries is available on the state level.  The bulk of what we do know comes from research based on data from the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, which contains medical records from hospitals around the country.  The findings that researchers have made on this topic have been startling, and they force us to refocus our attention on all firearm injuries, not simply those that are fatal.  It is estimated that there are approximately 3 non-fatal firearm injuries for every firearm fatality.³³  Research into firearm injuries by type (assault, unintentional, and suicide) indicates that there are roughly 3-4 non-fatal injuries per assault fatality, 13-17 non-fatal injuries per unintentional shooting fatality, and 1 non-fatal injury for every 3-4 suicide fatalities.⁷ 

The most comprehensive resource available on non-fatal firearm injuries is a 2001 report from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) that tracks both fatal and non-fatal firearm injuries between 1993 and 1998.⁷  Demographic patterns for non-fatal injuries tend to follow trends that are observed for fatal injuries.  Males account for a large majority of non-fatal firearm injuries.  Between 1993 and 1998, males accounted for roughly 88% of all non-fatal firearms injuries.  Young black males are at the highest risk for non-fatal injuries.  During this period, black males aged 20 to 24 suffered non-fatal injuries at a rate of 689.4 per 100,000, more than four times that rate for white males of the same age.  In general, males between the ages of 15 and 24 had the highest rates of non-fatal injuries over this period.  Among females, rates were also highest among 15 to 24 year olds, and black females in this age group were at the highest risk, roughly 8 to 10 times that of white females of the same age.  Other significant trends that were identified in the CDC report include the following:

• The proportion of persons who died from gunshot wounds increased with age.

• Of those who survived a gunshot wound and who were treated in a hospital emergency room, roughly 55% were hospitalized or transferred, and the other 45% were treated and released.

• Although unintentional injury accounts for less than 4% of firearm-related deaths, it accounts for 17% of non-fatal firearm-related injuries treated in U.S. hospital emergency departments.

• The majority of non-fatal unintentional injuries were to the extremities; 26.2% to the arm or hand and 45.6% to the leg or foot.  72% were self-inflicted, and 11% were inflicted by a friend or acquaintance.  Discounting cases in which the location of the injury was not reported, 71% were reported to have occurred in a home or apartment.  Discounting cases in which the type of gun involved was not reported, handguns were reported to be involved in 65% of cases.   

• The majority of non-fatal injuries from assault were to the trunk area and extremities.  Data on victim/offender relationship was not comprehensive, but discounting cases in which this data was not reported, about half of all cases were reported to involve attacks by strangers.  Discounting cases in which the type of weapon involved was not reported, handguns were involved in over 80% of cases.   

• The majority of intentionally self-inflicted non-fatal injuries were to the head and upper trunk area.  Discounting cases in which the type of firearm involved was not reported, handguns were involved in over 70% of cases.  Discounting cases in which the location of the injury was not reported, over 90% of cases occurred in a home or apartment.

• Persons who have never been married are generally at higher risk for every type of non-fatal firearm injury than married persons.

• In general, non-fatal firearm injuries have fluctuated, but declined substantially since 1993.  The rate for all non-fatal firearm injuries declined by over 40% between 1993 and 1998.  Additionally, unintentional non-fatal injuries, non-fatal assault injuries, and non-fatal self-inflicted injuries all declined by roughly 40% over this period.

 The decrease in non-fatal injuries is good news.  However, we must constantly remind ourselves that so many of these injuries can be prevented, and we must be vigilant in our attempts to do just that.  And, more research, evaluation, and practical application of gun violence prevention strategies must occur before we can determine with certainty the reasons for the recent decline in gun violence.

 Firearm Crime In Michigan and Nationwide

 Unfortunately, we know little about gun crime in Michigan.  Although the Michigan State Police releases the Michigan Uniform Crime Report every year, this report does not track firearm use in crime.  However, examining national data can help to identify trends that are likely to occur in Michigan.

 According the 2000 National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), as conducted by the U.S. Department of Justice, over 530,000 violent crimes in 2000 were committed with firearms.³⁴

• 8% of violent crimes in 2000 involved a firearm:

• 3% of rapes and sexual assaults were committed with firearms.

• 26% of robberies were committed with firearms.

• 6% of assaults were committed with firearms.

The FBI’s Uniform Crime Report (UCR) suggests that firearm use may be more widespread, but this discrepancy is likely due to the different methodology of each report.³⁵  The 1999 UCR found that firearms were used in roughly 40% of robberies and 18% of aggravated assaults nationwide.  The UCR also found regional differences in gun use as well.  Gun use in both robbery and aggravated assault was higher in the Midwest and South than in the Northeast and West.  Firearm use in robbery was over 43% in the Midwest, 34% in the Northeast and the West, and 45% in the South.  Firearm use in aggravated assault was 21% in the Midwest, 12% in the Northeast, 16% in the West, and 20% in the South.  In general, firearm crime rates in cities were higher than those of suburban areas, which in turn were higher than those of rural areas.  The UCR provides state level data that suggests gun use in Michigan may be more widespread than it is in the rest of the country.  Firearms were used in 48% of robberies and 24% of aggravated assaults in Michigan that were reported to the FBI in 1999.  Examining rates of firearm robbery and aggravated assault also bears this point out.  The UCR reports a firearm robbery rate of 58.7 per 100,000, compared to Michigan’s rate of 72.4 per 100,000.  The discrepancy for aggravated assault was even greater, as the national rate of aggravated assaults involving firearms was 61.3 per 100,000, while that of Michigan was a full 1.5 times higher, at 92 per 100,000.

 It is also important to observe trends among offenders.  Research by the U.S. Department of Justice indicates that weapons arrestees are predominantly male, aged 18 and over, and white.³⁶  However, weapons arrest rates per 100,000 people are highest for teens and blacks, and arrests of juveniles comprise a significant proportion of weapons arrest.

 Eighteen to twenty year olds are at the highest risk for committing gun crime.  This age group is more likely to use firearms in murders than are adults aged 21 and older.³⁷  This age group is also more likely to use firearms in non-lethal crime such as assault, rape and robbery.  15% of offenders aged 18 to 20 used a firearm in such crimes, compared to only 10% of offenders aged 21 and older, and 5% of offenders aged 17 and under.³⁷

 One of the few sources of data on firearm crime in Michigan suggests that, as is the case on the national level, perpetrators of firearm crime often have prior involvement with the criminal justice system.  According to a survey of juvenile weapons offenders in Michigan, the overwhelming majority of gun offenders were arrested for at least two “adult”, as opposed to “juvenile,” offenses, and only 1% had no previous “adult” experience with the criminal justice system.³⁸  According to the U.S. Department of Justice, in 1992, 42% of felony weapons defendants were involved in the criminal justice system at the time of their arrest: 17% were on probation, 10% were on parole, and 14% were on pretrial release.⁴⁰  Additionally, of the 34% of felony weapons defendants who had at least one prior felony conviction, over half had two or more felony convictions.⁴⁰

  The likelihood that a violent offender is armed has fluctuated over the past 20-plus years.  The rate of offenses committed with pistols and revolvers rose from 9.2% in 1979 to 12.7 percent in 1992.  However, in 2000, only 8% of violent crimes involved a firearm.³⁴  The Department of Justice Reports that the number of crimes involving firearms declined steadily from 1993 to 1999.⁴⁰  While 32% of all murders, robberies, and aggravated assaults in 1993 involved firearms, just 25% of these crimes involved firearms by 1999.  Firearm use in aggravated assaults declined from 25% in 1993 to 18% in 1999, and firearm use in robbery declined from 42% in 1993 to 40% in 1999. 

 This decline is good news.  Research suggests that victims of robberies and assaults are far more likely to die when a perpetrator is armed with a gun than when a perpetrator is armed with another weapon or is unarmed.^41,42,43  In the simplest terms then, decreased gun use in crime means that crime is less lethal. 

___________________________________________________

Citations: A Closer Look at Firearm Fatalities, Injuries, and Crime:  Michigan and Nationwide

1)       Goldberg R, Man, 19, charged in death of girl, Lansing State Journal, March 3, 2000

2)       Shine KN, Judge clears gun ex-owner in police death, Detroit Free Press, February 16, 2001

3)       Feighan M, Twist in pizzeria slaying gives mom hope, The Detroit News, March 4, 2001

4)       Hansen RJ, Man charged in unsecured handgun case, The Detroit News, July 24, 2001

5)       Associated Press, McNamara shooter has history of mental illness, father says, The Detroit News, September 22, 2001

6)       U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Estimated Firearm Crime, Retrieved from: www.ojp/usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/guncrime.txt

7)       Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, CDC Surveillance Summaries, Surveillance for Fatal and Nonfatal Firearm-Related Injuries – United States, 1993-1998, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, April 13, 2001 /Vol. 50 / no. SS-2

8)       Milton S. Eisenhower Foundation, To Establish Justice, To Insure Domestic Tranquility: A Thirty Year Update of the National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence, 1999

9)       Centers For Disease Control, Compressed Mortality File, Retrieved from: http://wonder.cdc.gov/mortsql.shtml

10)    Michigan Department of Community Health, Michigan Firearm Death Statistics 1988-1998, Death File, DVR&HS

11)    Cook PJ, Ludwig J, Gun Violence:  The Real Costs, Oxford University Press, 2000

12)    U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Homicide Trends in the U.S.: Weapons Used, Retrieved from: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/weapons.htm

13)    U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Homicide Trends in the U.S.: Weapons Used, Retrieved from: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/weaponstab.htm

14)    U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Homicide Trends in the U.S.: Homicide Circumstances, Retrieved from: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/circumguntab.htm

15)    The Department of the Treasury and the Department of Justice, Gun Crime in the Age Group 18-20, June 1999

16)    EPIC MRA, Special Statewide Poll- Gun Ownership Issues, Commissioned by The Michigan Partnership to Prevent Gun Violence, November 6, 2000

17)    Kaplan MS, Geling O, Sociodemographic and geographic patterns of firearm suicide in the United States, 1989-1993, Health & Place, 1999; 5:179-185

18)    Kaplan MS, Geling O, Firearm suicides and homicides in the United States:  regional variations and patterns of gun ownership, Soc Sci Med, 1998; 46 (9): 1227-1233

19)    Kellermann AL et al., Suicide in the home in relation to gun ownership, N Engl J Med, 1992; 327:467-472

20)    Michigan Department of Community Health, 1999 Death File

21)    National Institute of Mental Health, "Suicide Facts," Retrieved from: http://www.nimh.nih.gov/research/suifact.htm

22)    Kellerman AL, Wackerle JF, Preventing Firearm Injuries.  Ann Emerg Med, 1988; 32:77-79 

23)    Wintemute GJ et al., Mortality Among Recent Purchasers of Handguns. NEJM 1999; 341:1583-1589

24)    Grossman DC et al., Self-inflicted and unintentional firearm injuries among children and adolescents:  the source of the firearm.  Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med (BWF), 1999; 153 (8):875-878 

25)    Wintemute GJ et al., The choice of weapons in firearm suicides, Am J Public Health, 1988; 78(7):824-826

26)    Wintemute et al., When children shoot children: 88 unintended deaths in California, JAMA, 1987; 257(22):3107-3109

27)    Wintemute et al., Unintentional firearm deaths in California. J Trauma, 1989; 29(4):457-461

28)    Martin JR et al., Accidental firearm fatalities among New Mexico children, Ann Emerg Med, 1991; 20(1):58-61  

29)    Cherry D et al., A population based study of unintentional firearm fatalities, Inj Prev, 2001; 7(1):62-65

30)    Sinauer et al., Unintentional, nonfatal firearm-related injuries, JAMA, 1996; 275(22):1740-1743

31)    Ikeda RM et al., Fatal firearm injuries in the United States 1962-1994, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, 1997

32)    Centers for Disease Control, Rates of Homicide, Suicide, and Firearm-Related Death Among Children -- 26 Industrialized Countries, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 1997; 46:101-105

33)    Annest JL et al, National estimates of nonfatal firearm-related injuries: beyond the tip of the iceberg, JAMA, 1995; 273:1749-1754

34)    U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Criminal Victimization 2000: Changes 1999-2000 with Trends 1993-2000, June 2001

35)    Federal Bureau of Investigation, Crime in the United States 1999, Uniform Crime Reports

36)    U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Weapons Offenses and Offenders, November 1995

37)    The Department of the Treasury and The Department of Justice, Gun Crime in the Age Group 18-20, June 1999

38)    Huebner BM et al., Firearm Use Among Michigan’s Youthful Offender Population, Michigan Justice Statistics Center, Michigan State University, March 2001

39)    U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, Violent Offenders Increasingly Likely to be Armed, February 1994 

40)    U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Estimated Firearm Crime, Retrieved from: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/guns.htm

41)    Zimring FE, Hawkins G, Crime is Not the Problem:  Lethal Violence in America, 1997

42)    Cook PJ, Robbery Violence, Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 1987; 78(2) 357-376

43)    Newton GD, Zimring FE, Firearms and Violence in American Life:  A Staff Report Submitted to the National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence, Washington, D.C.: National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence, 1969